1. Field of the Invention
The present invention concerns managing e-mail messages, and more particularly concerns moving e-mail messages from a user inbox to a folder responsive to a user action, and then re-sending the message from the folder back to the user inbox responsive occurrence of a certain time.
2. Related Art
E-mail is so extensively used that it is often difficult to keep up with incoming e-mail messages, which compete with one another for the recipient's attention. This problem has previously been addressed in a variety of ways.
Referring now to FIG. 1, a view is depicted of an inbox 110, according to the prior art. In this view, e-mail message list 120 is shown listing three messages. The list 120 displays information for “Date,” “From” and “Subject” fields 130. The inbox 110 view includes buttons 140 for selectively saving, forwarding, replying to or deleting messages in the list. One developer has suggested that a sender include a date and time in the subject field 130 of an e-mail message, as shown for one of the messages in the list 120 depicted in FIG. 1. IBM Research Disclosure, June 1998, page 807. Then, when the recipient views the message list 120 and observes the date and time in the subject field 130 for one of the messages, the recipient/user may initiate a date and time folder program. Presumably this may be done such as by actuating a date/time button 140 for the message, as shown. Responsively, the program receives the date and time of the e-mail message and stores the message in a date/time folder 160. A process 170 of the program sets a timer responsive to the date and time of the subject field 130.
Referring now to FIG. 2, the e-mail message 210 is shown that was stored in FIG. 1 in folder 160. According to the Research Disclosure, page 807, the program automatically flashes the e-mail message 210 on the user's display when the specified date/time occurs. A dialog box 220 is also automatically flashed on the user's display, presenting the user with means to view or execute any attachment to the message 210. The box 220 also permits the user to select to ignore the message 210. Alternatively, the user may “snooze” the message 210 for some variable number of minutes, whereupon the message 210 and dialog box 220 will again automatically flash on the user's display. This arrangement is useful, but it is geared toward control by use of the subject field, which is originally composed by the sender. Use of the same field by the recipient might lead to confusion. Also, a user may find it intrusive to have an e-mail message automatically pop up on the user display at a scheduled time. The Research disclosure does not indicate other options for dealing with the message.
Referring now to FIG. 3, another prior art arrangement is depicted. In this case, the developer suggests that there should also be a “category,” or the like, among the fields 130 for the messages in the inbox 110 message list 120, so that the recipient may selectively categorize messages as “action items.” S. Whittaker and C. Snider, “Email Overload: Exploring Personal Information Management of Email,” Human Factors in Computing Systems. Common Ground, CHI 96 Conference Proceedings, 1996, pp. 276–283, p. 282. One implementation of this disclosure is depicted in FIG. 3. Whittaker et al. indicate that messages categorized as action items are left in the inbox 110, as depicted here. They also mention for action items that cannot be or do not need to be done immediately that it would be useful for these items to be programmed to “reappear.” Whittaker et al. do not indicate how this reappearance should be implemented. Presumably, one manner of “reappearing” consistent with the teaching by Whittaker et al. that action items should remain in the inbox 110 would be an arrangement similar to what is set out herein in the above described FIG's 1 and 2. That is, in accordance with the IBM Research Disclosure a “reappearing” e-mail message would automatically flash on the user's screen at the designated time. As previously stated, however, a user may find this rather intrusive.
This has been a brief review of two prior art disclosures known to the applicant regarding how to manage e-mail messages. This review illustrates that a need exists for further improvements in managing e-mail messages.